MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How to write in Plautdietsch?

2019· article· en· W2984735401 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVestnik NSU Series Linguistics and Intercultural Communication · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistic research and analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanLinguisticsDiphthongSpellingHistoryPronunciationStandard languageVowel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article raises issues related to written fixation of the oral Mennonite language called Plautdietsch. The Mennonites – members of one of the Protestant churches, established first in Holland and northern Germany – changed their place of residence over the centuries. The Mennonite language emerged in Prussia and later in Ukraine, where their large colonies had lived. Being a striking feature of this specific ethno-confessional community, Plautdietsch was and still is used almost exclusively in oral communication and does not have any established written standard. The phonology of Plautdietsch may be identified, in general, as Low German, although there is a number of significant phonological features are not characteristic of Low German area. Now the Plautdietsch native speakers live all over the world: in Canada, Germany, Russia, in particular, in Siberia, where their own, yet unstable, written standard of the language is being formed. One of the main problems concerning its fixation is caused by the complicated vocalism and high instability observed in the pronunciation of many vowels and diphthongs, the main source of difficulties preventing elaboration of the means for writing. In this paper, we focus on these unstable features of the vocal system. It provides a brief overview of currently available written samples of Plautdietsch, produced in Canada, Germany, and Russia. Some of them are based on the Latin alphabet and norms of the German spelling. Others, on the contrary, depart from it, using specific letter combinations, unknown earlier, introducing geminates (double consonants), refusing to spell nouns with a capital letter or to use umlauts (for technical convenience). Developments and tentative approaches of some Germanists from Russia who introduced their own ways of writing Plautdietsch in their research papers are presented. As an illustration, the samples of such a graphic system, elaborated by the linguist from Novosibirsk I. A. Kanakin (1940–2018), are given. They were not published and are kept in the personal archive of the author of the article. Our own principle of writing is presented too, and this as a part of the project implementation – compiling and publishing a small handbook for reading in this language, which is addressed to children, whose native language is Plautdietsch and who study literary German at school. Taking this into account, the most appropriate ad-hoc solution seems to use a form of writing that is close to German spelling and is accepted today in Germany.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it